DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to application filed on July 1st, 2025 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to for the following informalities:
Fig. 3 shows the bar tack 94 as being vertical; however, all other illustrations of 94 (Figs. 4, 5, 14, 15) show the element as being horizontal
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0045] “safely issue” should read “safety issue”
[0063] “fasteners 248” should read “fasteners 48”
no material has been disclosed for mesh lining 96, such as in [0071]; though it is shown as being part of the disclosed gown compared to known surgical gown trademarked “ComPel”, no generic terminology for the trademark has been provided; furthermore, [0071] compares the disclosed gown to USPN 11576449, which is not found in an IDS; as a courtesy, the reference has been cited in the PTO-892
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 12 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 Line 2 before “front panel” add –the—
Disagreement with any of the aforementioned may warrant at least a 112(b) indefiniteness rejection without constituting a new rejection
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim(s) 17, 18 is/are rejected under U.S.C. 112(b).
The term “the location” in Claim 17 Line 3 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear which specific location is being referred to, as Claim 17 depends on Claim 16, which established a plurality of “gripping locations.” For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the term will be interpreted as “at least one location of the gripping locations.”
The term "highly" in claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "highly" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claim 18, which depends on Claim 17, gives an example as “orange or red” versus “green.” However, it is unclear if this is the only metes and bounds to the term. Examiner recommends reciting “different colors” instead of “highly contrasting colors”, or otherwise specifying the colors.
Dependent claims are rejected at the least for depending on rejected claims.
Claim Interpretation
The term “convenient” in Claim 16 will be considered met inasmuch as Claim 16 Lines 1-3 “pair of pull loops connected to the central gown body along opposite sides of a waist region of the wearer and along connections of the front panel to the back panel” is met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
FIRST REJECTION: Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen.
Regarding Claim 19, Sleesen teaches a rear-opening protective gown defining a personal protective equipment garment (it is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations; nevertheless, see Fig. 4, wherein Fig. 4 is the embodiment utilized; although recitations may be directed to a different embodiment, such as Figs. 1-3, it is understood that Fig. 4 having the same numerals and concepts as recited for Figs. 1-3 as applicable would also have the recitations apply to Fig. 4, especially in light of Col. 7 Lines 49-53 "Fig. 4 shows a front view of another embodiment of a garment 400...generally similar to the garment 100 shown in Figs. 1 and 2, and corresponding elements are identified with the same reference designations in Figs. 1, 2, and 4"; as such, see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 27-28 "jacket 100 is equipped with a central zipper 102", wherein rear is relative and merely a matter of perspective; Sleesen teaches a garment with an opening which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being rear-opening, protective, and personal equipment gown, inasmuch as the structure of a gown has been defined), the protective gown comprising:
a central gown body sized to wrap around at least a torso area of a wearer (see Fig. 1; Sleesen teaches a central gown body which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being sized to wrap at least a torso as recited),
the central gown body including a front panel and a back panel (see Figs. 1, 3; Col. 5 Line 30 "Fig. 3 shows a rear view of the jacket of Fig. 1"; Col. 5 Line 26 "Fig. 1 shows a front view", wherein front/back are relative and a matter of perspective),
with the back panel being separated into a right portion and a left portion such that the protective gown opens at the back panel (see Fig. 1),
wherein one of the right portion and left portion includes an overlapping section (wherein zipper teeth overlap one another),
and the other of the right portion and left portion includes a corresponding overlapped section (met by the zipper),
the overlapping section and overlapped section being configured to lay over one another when the protective gown is donned by the wearer and closed (Sleesen teaches the zipper which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of the lay over when gown is donned and closed),
a ventilation cape formed by a ventilation opening in the central gown body (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 31-33 "cover panels or elements 110 are affixed to front panels 106 to adjustably overlie portions of the openings 108"),
the mesh lining being of a more porous and breathable material than the central gown body (see Fig. 2; Col. 6 Lines 64-65 "ventilation elements 210 are fabricated of a relatively non-stretchable air permeable sheet material"; for central gown body-- Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl"; Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl, and ventilation elements 210 are constructed of perforated leather or vinyl"; wherein the material of mesh lining has perforations and therefore is more porous and breathable),
wherein the ventilation opening is formed in the overlapping section of the back panel and the overlapping section includes at least some of the mesh lining arranged underneath the ventilation cape (wherein the overlapping section symmetrical right side of the back panel),
such that the mesh lining allows for air to pass between an interior and an exterior of the gown (Sleesen teaches the mesh lining which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of allowing air to pass, especially in light of the recitations)
while the ventilation cape provides a barrier covering for the mesh lining to provide splash protection in an area of the ventilation opening (Sleesen teaches the ventilation cape covering the mesh lining which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being a barrier to provide splash protection in the area as recited);
a pair of opposing left and right sleeves that cooperate with and extend away from the central gown body for receiving arms of the wearer (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Line 28 "arms 104"; Sleesen teaches the sleeves/arms which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of receiving wearer arms);
a neck opening defined by the central gown body adjacent a shoulder region of the central gown body located proximate a junction of the left and right sleeves with the central gown body (see Fig. 1); and
a plurality of fastening elements positioned on or proximate to the back panel and configured to permit doffing of the gown (Col. 6 Lines 48-50 "zippers 120…adjustably couple cover panel 110 to front panel 106"; Sleesen teaches the zipper teeth as plurality of fastening elements which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of permitting doffing).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
SECOND REJECTION: Claim(s) 1-3, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi.
Regarding Claim 1, Sleesen teaches a rear-opening protective gown defining a personal protective equipment garment (it is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations; nevertheless, see Fig. 4, wherein Fig. 4 is the embodiment utilized; although recitations may be directed to a different embodiment, such as Figs. 1-3, it is understood that Fig. 4 having the same numerals and concepts as recited for Figs. 1-3 as applicable would also have the recitations apply to Fig. 4, especially in light of Col. 7 Lines 49-53 "Fig. 4 shows a front view of another embodiment of a garment 400...generally similar to the garment 100 shown in Figs. 1 and 2, and corresponding elements are identified with the same reference designations in Figs. 1, 2, and 4"; as such, see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 27-28 "jacket 100 is equipped with a central zipper 102", wherein rear is relative and merely a matter of perspective; Sleesen teaches a garment with an opening which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being rear-opening, protective, and personal equipment gown, inasmuch as the structure of a gown has been defined), the protective gown comprising:
a central gown body sized to wrap around at least a torso area of a wearer (see Fig. 1; Sleesen teaches a central gown body which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being sized to wrap at least a torso as recited),
the central gown body including a front panel and a back panel (see Figs. 1, 3; Col. 5 Line 30 "Fig. 3 shows a rear view of the jacket of Fig. 1"; Col. 5 Line 26 "Fig. 1 shows a front view", wherein front/back are relative and a matter of perspective),
with the back panel being separated into a right portion and a left portion such that the protective gown opens at the back panel (see Fig. 1),
wherein one of the right portion and left portion includes an overlapping section (wherein zipper teeth overlap one another),
and the other of the right portion and left portion includes a corresponding overlapped section (met by the zipper),
the overlapping section and overlapped section being configured to lay over one another when the protective gown is donned by the wearer and closed (Sleesen teaches the zipper which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of the lay over when gown is donned and closed),
a ventilation cape formed by a ventilation opening in the central gown body (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 31-33 "cover panels or elements 110 are affixed to front panels 106 to adjustably overlie portions of the openings 108"),
wherein the ventilation cape is secured to the overlapping section that partially secures the ventilation opening closed and that forms a joint between the ventilation cape and the overlapping section (Col. 6 Lines 38-39 "cover panel 110 is stitched or otherwise permanently affixed to front panel 106 along edge 112");
a pair of opposing left and right sleeves that cooperate with and extend away from the central gown body for receiving arms of the wearer (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Line 28 "arms 104"; Sleesen teaches the sleeves/arms which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of receiving wearer arms);
a neck opening defined by the central gown body adjacent a shoulder region of the central gown body located proximate a junction of the left and right sleeves with the central gown body (see Fig. 1); and
a plurality of fastening elements positioned on or proximate to the back panel and configured to permit doffing of the gown (Col. 6 Lines 48-50 "zippers 120…adjustably couple cover panel 110 to front panel 106"; Sleesen teaches the zipper teeth as plurality of fastening elements which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of permitting doffing).
Sleesen does not explicitly teach that the cape is secured via a bar tack.
However, Sleesen already taught that the cape is secured via stitching, wherein a bar tack is a type of stitching.
Fathollahi teaches bar tack stitching ([0008] "jacket is comprised of a front right panel, a front left panel, and back panel. The panels…may be unitarily formed or bonded together, such as by stitching…and stitched elements may include single or multiple lines of stitching, bar tack stitches for improved strength").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s stitching to be bar tack as taught by Fathollahi as a known type of stitching to provide strength ([0008]), especially for various garment panels/elements.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the ventilation cape is located on the right portion of the back panel (see Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Modified Sleesen teaches wherein the bar tack is positioned at a middle of the ventilation cape (Sleesen teaches stitching at the middle, and therefore the bar tack as provided by Fathollahi).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the central gown body includes a top end and a bottom end opposite the top end (see Fig. 4),
with the neck opening being positioned proximate to the top end (see Fig. 4),
and wherein the ventilation opening is closer to the top end than the bottom end (see Fig. 4, wherein at least a portion of the opening is closer to the top than the bottom).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Park et al (USPN 8256023), herein Park.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the central gown body includes a top end and a bottom end opposite the top end (see Fig. 4),
with the neck opening being positioned proximate to the top end (see Fig. 4).
Sleesen does not explicitly teach and wherein the ventilation opening is oriented to face downwards towards the bottom end (but teaches the opposite).
Park teaches and wherein the ventilation opening is oriented to face downwards towards the bottom end (as another option to the opposite) (see Fig. 3; Col. 2 Lines 54-57 "open protective cover formed extended from an edge part of the opening-part fabric in the size enough to cover the open fastener part, so as to raise the opening-part fabric into an upward direction and to open"; see Fig. 7; Col. 3 Lines 18-21 "open protective cover formed extended from an edge part of the opening-part fabric in the size enough to cover the open fastener part, so as to drop the opening-part fabric into a downward direction").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s ventilation opening to be oriented as recited as taught by Park especially as Park teaches the orientations interchangeably, depending on aesthetic design choice.
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of McAmish et al (USPN 6235659), herein McAmish.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen further teaches a mesh lining (see Fig. 2; Col. 6 Lines 64-65 "ventilation elements 210 are fabricated of a relatively non-stretchable air permeable sheet material")
the mesh lining being of a more porous and breathable material than the central gown body (see Fig. 2; Col. 6 Lines 64-65 "ventilation elements 210 are fabricated of a relatively non-stretchable air permeable sheet material"; for central gown body-- Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl"; Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl, and ventilation elements 210 are constructed of perforated leather or vinyl"; wherein the material of mesh lining has perforations and therefore is more porous and breathable).
Sleesen does not explicitly teach the mesh lining being of a more porous and breathable material than the pair of opposing left and right sleeves.
McAmish teaches that the central gown body and sleeves are of the same material (see Fig. 1; Col. 3 Lines 23-29 "gown 10..comprises a body 12 having a front portion 14 and back portion 16 and a pair of sleeves 18...formed of a suitable nonwoven material to provide a disposable gown; however, a reusable fabric such as cotton, polyester and blends thereof may also be employed").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s arms 104 to be of the same material of central gown body/front panels 106 for easier manufacturing, thereby meeting the missing recitation.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 6.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the ventilation cape covers at least some of the mesh lining (Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl, and ventilation elements 210 are constructed of perforated leather or vinyl"; even if same material, clearly more breathable material with the vents; different STRUCTURE in the material).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 7.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the mesh lining is provided on other portions of the back panel beyond the ventilation opening (see Figs. 1, 4 for symmetrical mesh lining).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 7.
Sleesen further teaches wherein a width of the ventilation cape at the ventilation opening is wider than the mesh lining arranged at the ventilation opening (see Fig. 4; Col. 7 Line 54 "cover panels 410 are larger").
Sleesen at least suggests thereby blousing the ventilation cape to allow the ventilation cape to hang loose and open for increased ventilation flow (Col. 7 Lines 9-12 "Cover panel 110 may be retracted simply by rolling the fabric of the panel upon itself, or alternatively, the folded panel may be tucked into a specially provided lower pocket 214"; Sleesen teaches the wherein a width of the ventilation cape at the ventilation opening is wider than the mesh lining arranged at the ventilation opening which meets the structural limitations in the claims and therefore performs the blousing as recited, especially in light of the recitation, and especially as it is known in the art that such materials are capable of the blousing recited, see extrinsic evidence van der Sleesen USPN 6070274).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, and McAmish et al (USPN 6235659), herein McAmish, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Golde (USPN 7017191).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 6.
Sleesen does not explicitly teach wherein a material or materials defining the mesh lining is configured to meet snagging resistance performance metrics defined under ASTM D 3939-13 and under ASTM D 5362-13.
However, Sleesen already taught that the mesh lining (210) was perforate leather (Col. 7 Lines 1-2).
Golde teaches wherein perforate leather and knit mesh are interchangeable (see Fig. 10; Col. 7 Lines 27-29 "panel 46 may be made of perforate leather, or may be made of a woven or knitted material having a sufficiently open mesh as to allow air to permeate therethrough").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s mesh lining of perforate leather to be of knit mesh as taught by Golde as a simple substitution of one air permeable material for another (Col. 7 Lines 27-29).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s mesh lining of knit mesh, provided by Golde, to be configured to meet snagging resistance performance metrics defined under ASTM D 3939-13 and under ASTM D 5362-13, as a well known standard in the art, to perform to desired levels of use.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Wong (US Publication 2012/0246802) and Braun (USPN 7171695).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen further teaches wherein the central gown body includes a top end and a bottom end opposite the top end (see Fig. 4),
with the neck opening being positioned proximate to the top end (see Fig. 4).
Sleesen does not explicitly teach wherein the central gown body further comprises angled hems at the bottom end.
Wong teaches a central body further comprising hems at the bottom end (see Fig. 23; abstract "bottom hem (223) of a shirt"; [0118] "for jacket edges to be reinforced include...hem bottom").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s bottom ends with hems as taught by Wong to impede wear of edge ([0001]) via reinforcement ([0118]).
Braun teaches a central body further comprising angled bottom ends (see Fig. 1, 2; Col. 2 Lines 43-44 "back section 46" is longer than the front of the Col. 2 Line 32 "torso portion 14", thereby providing angled bottom ends).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s bottom ends to be angled as taught by Braun as a known structure for effective ventilation (see abstract).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 11.
Modified Sleesen further teaches wherein the angled hems are formed in front panel and the back panel (see Braun Figs. 1, 2).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 11.
Modified Sleesen further teaches wherein the angled hems are formed at opposite sides of the central gown body (see Braun Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Blanco (US Publication 2023/0292849).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen does not explicitly teach wherein at least some portions of the central body and/or at least some portions of the pair of opposite left and right sleeves comprises electrostatic dissipative or anti-static yarns.
Blanco teaches wherein at least some portions of the central body and/or at least some portions of the pair of opposite left and right sleeves comprises electrostatic dissipative or anti-static yarns (abstract "lint and static electricity resistant shirt...shirt is made from a special weave of polyester and carbon fibers"; [0009] "weave of the cloth is 95%-98% polyester and 2%-5% carbon fiber", wherein woven fibers indicates yarns).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify at least Sleesen’s central body with the anti-static yarns of Blanco to limit lint buildup ([0006]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Jascomb (USPN 11576449).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen does not explicitly teach wherein the neck opening defines a V-shaped collar.
Jascomb teaches wherein the neck opening defines a V-shaped collar (Col. 6 Lines 45-49 "v-neck shape of the collar forms an angle …results in a gown that …can still dissipate heat and humidity").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s neck opening to be the V-shape collar as taught by Jascomb in order to effectively dissipate heat and humidity (Col. 6 Lines 45-49), which Sleesen desires as well (title).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Bell (US Publication 2022/0192293).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Sleesen does not explicitly teach a pair of pull loops connected to the central gown body along opposite sides of a waist region of the wearer and along connections of the front panel to the back panel,
wherein the pull loops are sized and positioned to be configured to receive or be configured to be grasped by one or more fingers of hands to thereby provide convenient gripping locations to apply a doffing force to open and remove the protective gown,
the convenient gripping locations also being positioned away from portions of the protective gown along the front panel most likely to be soiled during use by the wearer.
Bell teaches a pair of pull loops connected to the central gown body along opposite sides of a waist region of the wearer and along connections of the front panel to the back panel (see Fig. 2; [0028] "Fig. 2 is a rear view of a…garment"; [0032] "handle/loop 18 is disposed approximately midway along the longitudinal seams 20 along each side of the garment 10 proximate to upper portion of the wearer's hips. Preferably, the loop/handles 18 are integrated with the seams 20 and attached to the jumper garment 10 along seam 20 at two spaced points", wherein seams 20 are the connections; Bell teaches the loops which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being for pull and along a waist region of a wearer),
wherein the pull loops are sized and positioned to be configured to receive or be configured to be grasped by one or more fingers of hands to thereby provide convenient gripping locations to apply a doffing force to open and remove the protective gown (see abstract; Bell teaches the pull loops with size and position which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being grasped as convenient gripping locations to apply a doffing force to open and remove the gown as recited; see claim interpretation for the term “convenient”),
the convenient gripping locations also being positioned away from portions of the protective gown along the front panel most likely to be soiled during use by the wearer (Bell teaches the loops at the convenient location which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being away from the portions recited).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen with the pull loops of Bell to assist with donning and doffing (abstract).
Claim(s) 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi, and Bell (US Publication 2022/0192293), as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Carpenter et al (USPN 5950240), herein Carpenter.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 16.
Modified Sleesen does not explicitly teach wherein each of the pull loops is formed from a material having a highly contrasting color from a material defining the central gown body to guide a person to the location where doffing forces should be applied to remove the protective gown.
Carpenter teaches wherein each of the pull loops is formed from a material having a highly contrasting color from a material defining the garment to guide a person to a location (as best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections-- Col. 4 Lines 8-13 "bar tack or other concentrated stitches are employed on the exterior and interior of the sleeve to fix the loop to the jacket cuff, preventing inadvertent tearing or pulling out of the loop. A red or other bright color loop may be used which contrasts against the color of the cuff to ensure the loop is readily visible to the user"; see Fig. 1; Col. 3 Line 10 "loop 22 may be formed from a flexible, resilient cord"; abstract "loop, securely retaining the unworn glove to the jacket").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s loops to be a contrasting color from elsewhere in the garment, such as the central gown body, as taught by Carpenter, in order to provide visibility (Col. 4 Lines 8-13).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that modified Sleesen teaches wherein the highly contrasting color to guide a person to the location where doffing forces should be applied to remove the protective gown (as best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--modified Sleesen teaches the highly contrasting color and the loops at locations for doffing as established in Claim 16 which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of guiding a person to one of the doffing force locations).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Sleesen teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 17.
Modified Sleesen further teaches wherein at least a portion of each of the pull loops is orange or red in color (see Carpenter Col. 4 Lines 8-13).
Modified Sleesen does not explicitly teach and at least a portion of the central gown body is green in color.
However, it has been held that claim limitations to ornamentation which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP 2144.04 and In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen such that at least a portion of the central gown body is green for aesthetic design choice, especially as such a color for at least a portion of a garment is known in the art (see extrinsic evidence Bayer USPN 6345393), and especially as modified Sleesen desires a color contrasting from red for the rest of the garment.
THIRD REJECTION: Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Sleesen (USPN 5704064), herein Sleesen, in view of Park et al (USPN 8256023), herein Park, and Fathollahi et al (US Publication 2017/0245567), herein Fathollahi.
Regarding Claim 20, Sleesen teaches a rear-opening protective gown defining a personal protective equipment garment (it is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations; nevertheless, see Fig. 4, wherein Fig. 4 is the embodiment utilized; although recitations may be directed to a different embodiment, such as Figs. 1-3, it is understood that Fig. 4 having the same numerals and concepts as recited for Figs. 1-3 as applicable would also have the recitations apply to Fig. 4, especially in light of Col. 7 Lines 49-53 "Fig. 4 shows a front view of another embodiment of a garment 400...generally similar to the garment 100 shown in Figs. 1 and 2, and corresponding elements are identified with the same reference designations in Figs. 1, 2, and 4"; as such, see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 27-28 "jacket 100 is equipped with a central zipper 102", wherein rear is relative and merely a matter of perspective; Sleesen teaches a garment with an opening which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being rear-opening, protective, and personal equipment gown, inasmuch as the structure of a gown has been defined), the protective gown comprising:
a central gown body having a top end and a bottom end (see Fig. 4), and being
sized to wrap around at least a torso area of a wearer (see Fig. 1; Sleesen teaches a central gown body which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being sized to wrap at least a torso as recited),
the central gown body including a front panel and a back panel (see Figs. 1, 3; Col. 5 Line 30 "Fig. 3 shows a rear view of the jacket of Fig. 1"; Col. 5 Line 26 "Fig. 1 shows a front view", wherein front/back are relative and a matter of perspective),
with the back panel being separated into a right portion and a left portion such that the protective gown opens at the back panel (see Fig. 1),
wherein one of the right portion and left portion includes an overlapping section (wherein zipper teeth overlap one another),
and the other of the right portion and left portion includes a corresponding overlapped section (met by the zipper),
the overlapping section and overlapped section being configured to lay over one another when the protective gown is donned by the wearer and closed (Sleesen teaches the zipper which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of the lay over when gown is donned and closed),
a ventilation cape formed by a ventilation opening in the central gown body (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Lines 31-33 "cover panels or elements 110 are affixed to front panels 106 to adjustably overlie portions of the openings 108"),
wherein the ventilation opening is formed in the overlapping section of the back panel (wherein the overlapping section is the symmetrical/right side of the back panel),
wherein the ventilation opening is closer to the top end than the bottom end (see Fig. 4, wherein at least a portion of the opening is closer to the top than the bottom),
stitching that secures the ventilation cape to the right portion of the back panel (Col. 6 Lines 38-39 "cover panel 110 is stitched or otherwise permanently affixed to front panel 106 along edge 112"),
wherein the stitching at least partially secures the ventilation opening closed and forms a joint between the ventilation cape and the back panel (Col. 6 Lines 38-39 "cover panel 110 is stitched or otherwise permanently affixed to front panel 106 along edge 112");
a mesh lining being of a more porous and breathable material than the central gown body (see Fig. 2; Col. 6 Lines 64-65 "ventilation elements 210 are fabricated of a relatively non-stretchable air permeable sheet material"; for central gown body-- Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl"; Col. 7 Lines 1-2 "front panels 106 are constructed of leather or vinyl, and ventilation elements 210 are constructed of perforated leather or vinyl"; wherein the material of mesh lining has perforations and therefore is more porous and breathable),
wherein the overlapping section includes at least some of the mesh lining arranged underneath the ventilation cape (see Fig. 4, right side/overlapping section having mesh lining/ventilation elements 210 under the cape/cover panel 110),
such that the mesh lining allows for air to pass between an interior and an exterior of the gown (Sleesen teaches the mesh lining which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of allowing air to pass, especially in light of the recitations)
while the ventilation cape provides a barrier covering for the mesh lining to provide splash protection in an area of the ventilation opening (Sleesen teaches the ventilation cape covering the mesh lining which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being a barrier to provide splash protection in the area as recited);
and wherein the mesh lining is also provided on at least some portion of the overlapped section (see Fig. 4 for the symmetrical mesh lining 210 on the left/overlapped section);
wherein a width of the ventilation cape at the ventilation opening is wider than the mesh lining arranged at the ventilation opening (see Fig. 4; Col. 7 Line 54 "cover panels 410 are larger");
a pair of opposing left and right sleeves that cooperate with and extend away from the central gown body for receiving arms of the wearer (see Fig. 1; Col. 6 Line 28 "arms 104"; Sleesen teaches the sleeves/arms which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of receiving wearer arms);
a neck opening defined by the central gown body adjacent a shoulder region of the central gown body located proximate a junction of the left and right sleeves with the central gown body (see Fig. 1); and
wherein the neck opening is positioned proximate to the top end (see Fig. 4); and
a plurality of fastening elements positioned on or proximate to the back panel and configured to permit doffing of the gown (Col. 6 Lines 48-50 "zippers 120…adjustably couple cover panel 110 to front panel 106"; Sleesen teaches the zipper teeth as plurality of fastening elements which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of permitting doffing).
Sleesen at least suggests the width thereby blousing the ventilation cape to allow the ventilation cape to hang loose and open for increased ventilation flow (Col. 7 Lines 9-12 "Cover panel 110 may be retracted simply by rolling the fabric of the panel upon itself, or alternatively, the folded panel may be tucked into a specially provided lower pocket 214"; Sleesen teaches the wherein a width of the ventilation cape at the ventilation opening is wider than the mesh lining arranged at the ventilation opening which meets the structural limitations in the claims and therefore performs the blousing as recited, especially in light of the recitation, and especially as it is known in the art that such materials are capable of the blousing recited, see extrinsic evidence van der Sleesen USPN 6070274).
Sleesen does not explicitly teach and wherein the ventilation opening is oriented to face downwards towards the bottom end (but teaches the opposite).
Park teaches and wherein the ventilation opening is oriented to face downwards towards the bottom end (as another option to the opposite) (see Fig. 3; Col. 2 Lines 54-57 "open protective cover formed extended from an edge part of the opening-part fabric in the size enough to cover the open fastener part, so as to raise the opening-part fabric into an upward direction and to open"; see Fig. 7; Col. 3 Lines 18-21 "open protective cover formed extended from an edge part of the opening-part fabric in the size enough to cover the open fastener part, so as to drop the opening-part fabric into a downward direction").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s ventilation opening to be oriented as recited as taught by Park especially as Park teaches the orientations interchangeably, depending on aesthetic design choice.
Sleesen does not explicitly teach that the stitching is a bar tack.
Fathollahi teaches bar tack stitching ([0008] "jacket is comprised of a front right panel, a front left panel, and back panel. The panels…may be unitarily formed or bonded together, such as by stitching…and stitched elements may include single or multiple lines of stitching, bar tack stitches for improved strength").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sleesen’s stitching to be bar tack as taught by Fathollahi as a known type of stitching to provide strength ([0008]), especially for various garment panels/elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be used to formulate a rejection if necessary: Anderson (GB 219534), Van der Sleesen (USPN 5507042), Van der Sleesen (USPN 6868557) directed to gown with ventilation cape; Foster (USPN 4731883) directed to a pocket covering a vent; Thompson (USPN 5642526), Schmeltz (FR 2601860), Paola (USPN 3086215), Miller (USPN 4608715), Geneder et al (USPN 12402674), Valentine (USPN 12383003) directed to ventilation cape as the rear-opening in a garment; Wilfong et al (US Publication 2021/0401091), Christou-Kelly (US Publication 2010/0050315), Lin et al (USPN 7549178),McLennan (USPN 6134715), Benstock (USPN 5184351), Rotanz et al (USPN 3359569), Welke (USPN 4016604), Udell (USPN 5050243), Taylor (USPN 5813052) directed to rear-opening garments; Lash et al (USPN 3045243) directed to overlapping portions; Dauphinais (USPN 1582385), Bay et al (USPN 6263510), Burns et al (USPN 6339845), Pelton (USPN 1084106), Holmes (USPN 1092105) directed to ventilation capes; Remsky (USPN 5228141), Kramer (USPN 5832536) directed to bar tack stitching; Bay (USPN 7111328), Reimer (USPN 8756714) directed to plurality of fastening elements; Stewart et al (USPN 11166500), Stewart et al (US Publication 2017/0325523) directed to ESD yarns; Chase et al (USPN 12076295) directed to pull loops; Spruill (USPN 6148445), Rand (USPN 3789431) directed to contrasting color.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Grace Huang whose telephone number is (571)270-5969. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30am-5:30pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khoa Huynh can be reached on 571-272-4888. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GRACE HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732